Psychology: Art or Science?

[Socod_badne]

It is my assertion that psychology is art dressed up as science/medicine. Take the case of psychologist assessing the help a youngester with behaviour problems should recieve. After going through his diagnosis routine, the psychologist will recommend a plausible treatment regime. But have another psychologist assess the same patient and he's liable to submitt equally convincing treatment. Yet, a third psychologist may still come to entirely dissimilar conclusion. Each one of them is right in own way as their prognosis is accompanied by reasoned recommendation. But regarding the etiology of patient's symptoms, not an iota of knowledge is gained. Like artists, psychologists paint us a picture of the world as they see it. Like art critics, they pass personal opinions. Reason being there is no way to disprove their suggestions. No tests exist that would show psychotherapy works. Contrast that with science or medicine and you begin to see why these two disciplines have been sucessfull at solving real human problems. If a doctor thinks a patient has TB, whether he is right or wrong is easily ascertainable by running medical tests like X-Ray and skin tests. A scientist who claims a discovery is susceptible to falsification attempts. But with psychologist, we're stuck with his/her words.

 

If you think this is all hypothetical, consider this real life case. A man had a severe form of depression for over a decade. he has been through all the cliched routines. Seen a half dozen psychologists administring scores psychotherapy sessions or talk sessions. Then one day he was advised by a medical doctor to consider taking Vitamin B12 deficiency test. The doc's hunch was nigh prescient, he was B12 deficient. Just weeks after taking B12 supplements he was all the sudden feeling good. His symptoms quickly evanesced. Now, this man spent over a decade pouring his heart out in psychotherapy sessions in the faint hope that he was being treated. Had psychology been considered art and not science, would this man not have gotten the proper treatment he needed?

 

To this day, psychotherapy is still widely used.

[Abu-Salman]

I quite agree with you for once,psychology is definitely not a science just like economics, anthropology or others theories unjustly branded as social "sciences".

 

Research in social fields could be conducted with rigorous statistical and mathematical tools; hence any brainwashing will be prevented as we'll get only results without definitive interpretations.

 

Depression is a case in point in this regard as scientifics findings reveal that a healthy living with an appropriate diet, regular physical excercise and spiritual meaning that translate into practise, ie accompanied by constant invocations and generosity, remain the best prevention and natural treatment.

 

Likewise the dysfunctions caused by a deficit in iode.

 

In fact, many so-called therapies are organically embodied into Islam while the Qura'an display a formidable knowledge of human minds, not mentioning the prophet educational methodology which results are still widely there to witness.

 

Shouldn't we deduct then that, scientifically, religion remain a natural and vital human need as body and mind strongly interact?

[Naden]

SB,

 

It is my assertion that psychology is art dressed up as science/medicine.

Could it be both?

 

I get what you're saying. In the 19th century (when it was the b*astard child of philosophy), psychology's folly began as an inferiority complex in the face of the physical sciences. In a thirst to prove that similar 'experiments' could be done to become a true science, they didn't give due credit to ideological goals mostly behind their research.

 

In many ways, it is more of an art than a science. It is also sociology. But that is a huge generalization because the field's just exploded in the past 30 years or so and what the general knows is usually the interpersonal drivel in Psychology Today or Dr. Phil. There are more applied fields in linguistics, cognitive, neurology, neuroimmunology, and medicine that psychological research is active in.

 

Like artists, psychologists paint us a picture of the world as they see it. Like art critics, they pass personal opinions.

I agree with your first statement but not necessarily the second. Your average therapist (who may or may not be a psychologist) will practice and apply the craft as he sees fit. Thanks to the many aspects of talk therapy that's pure quackery but tends to be attractive to the midlevel practitioner, very little is offered to the client but the opinions you speak of.

 

A scientist who claims a discovery is susceptible to falsification attempts. But with psychologist, we're stuck with his/her words.

Again, a very broad generalization, I'm afraid. Most medical doctors are not scientists and the diagnosis of illness can be art as well. The example of an infection like TB is not like one of back pain, for instance. One doctor can implicate muscles, another nerves, another stress, and so on. With functional disorders, sometimes you don't see what's wrong on an x-ray or in a blood sample and must rely on clinical presentation and self-reporting. Not all research done by psychologists we are 'stuck' with, many are falsifiable in both animal and human experimentation.

 

Had psychology been considered art and not science, would this man not have gotten the proper treatment he needed?

Any self-respecting psychologist/psychiatrist would have recommended a full check-up to rule out underlying physical causes for depression. Many disorders including the deficiency you spoke of, thyroid problems, anemia, and even some cancers can cause symptoms clustered togethered as depression. This man should sue for malpractice. There are instances of people going from one medical doctor to the next being prescribed all kinds or drugs but not offered either the diagnostics or the treatment they need. Again, psycho- and therapy quacks are abound but the field is simply too large to be dismissed. Will it disappear in favour of cognitive science and neuroscience? Maybe. Interpersonal psychology will always be around, though.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Djib-Somali:

Shouldn't we deduct then that, scientifically, religion remain a natural and vital human need as body and mind strongly interact?

Body and mind strongly interacting is psuedo-science, not science.

[Abu-Salman]

Do you deny the influence of your mind/psyche/whatever-you-call-it on your body or the placebo effect so central in medicine?

 

Are you hence asserting that our body is regulated by purely physical laws just like a sophisticated machine?

 

what about stress effects, for instance, which are linked statistically with increased risks of cancers, cardio-vascular diseases ect whereas positivity is linked with a stronger immune system and hence increased survival rate?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Naden:

Again, a very broad generalization, I'm afraid. Most medical doctors are not scientists and the diagnosis of illness can be art as well. The example of an infection like TB is not like one of back pain, for instance.

 

Doctors and scientists are comparable in the following way. Both devise a hypothesis, both test their hypothesis, both issue tangible claims for their hypothesis. Diagnosis is the equivalent of scientist's hypothesis. The one major difference between a Doc and a scientist is the Doc is knowledgeable with the etiology of many maladies. There's a body of accrued medical knowledge which the doctor relies on. A doctor wouldn't need to test his hypothesis that a patient who described to him the common symptoms associated with Influenza is indeed suffering from Influenza. All that will suffice, in the first viist, is prescribing the typical medication that have been demonstrated to work. If the patient returns couple weeks later complaining about the persistance of symptoms, then any competent doc would reconsider his initial hypothesis. THis time not only is he impelled to come up with a new hypothesis but test his hypothesis by sending the patient to take a series of tests.

 

Furthermore, we know the etiology of back problems. The reason being the design of the human body is most suitable for quadruped, not biped. Ever come across a 10 or 15 yr old complaining about back problems? Rarely if ever and that's because back problems arise from putting too much stress on our spinal cord from years of living life. Almost all of us will experience back problems of varying intensities as we age. Just like most of us will need to wear glasses for reading as we get older. For the exact same reason. Our eyes are poorly designed. Having said all of that, I agree that not all maladies are readily diagnosable. I just fail to see how that takes away from the method itself.

 

 

Not all research done by psychologists we are 'stuck' with, many are falsifiable in both animal and human experimentation.

 

I agree somewhat. The prevailing view among most psychologist today (to the best of my knowledge) is that psychotherapy, psychoanalysis, dream interpretations etc work.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Djib-Somali:

Do you deny the influence of your mind/psyche/whatever-you-call-it on your body or the placebo effect so central in medicine?

 

The mind and psyche (whatever that means) are mental state, not brain state. What does the placebo effect got to do with this other than show what is true for YOU is not the same as what is true in the real world. There's a difference between the world as each one of us sees it and reality. THere are two german words that aptly describe the difference that I can't recall right now. We're not covering virgin territory here.

 

 

Are you hence asserting that our body is regulated by purely physical laws just like a sophisticated machine?

 

 

Yes. Our body is most optimally regulated when all it's constituent components (organs like brain, liver, heart etc) are working in unison and as they should. Again, we're not covering new material, are we?

 

 

what about stress effects, for instance, which are linked statistically with increased risks of cancers, cardio-vascular diseases ect whereas positivity is linked with a stronger immune system and hence increased survival rate?

Link is not a cause.

[5]

I completely and utterly agree with SB, developmental psychology - study of progressive psychological changes that occur in human beings as they age - is art.

[Pujah]

psychalogy is part art part science. or they wouldn't be allowed to shell out so many anti depressants while at the same time asking silly questions as "so how does that make you feel"

[Naxar Nugaaleed]

you guys get really excited about irrilevent things. It a science because its classified so.

[rudy-Diiriye]

^lol. sb, u sound like tom cruise! lemme see u jump up/down on the couch!!

[Centurion]

After going through his diagnosis routine, the psychologist will recommend a plausible treatment regime. But have another psychologist assess the same patient and he's liable to submitt equally convincing treatment. Yet, a third psychologist may still come to entirely dissimilar conclusion. Each one of them is right in own way as their prognosis is accompanied by reasoned recommendation.

Perhaps it is more of a science than you know Socod_Badne,

Psychology, if you'd believe it, involves both a lot of medicine and mathematics.

In fact at most universities, Psychology students study part of their degree as part of the biological sciences school, they spend time learning the nervous system, and all other aspects of the body which can contribute or cause psychological abnormalities.

 

I'm sure, although not an expert by any means, that the first thing a psychologist would do is send the patient to get a medical examination done. Therefore i doubt there's the magnitude in variation of diagnosis you are implying.

 

Psychology is a science for a very good reason.

It is undertaken through logic and experimentation, trial and error.

Daily new discoveries are made, like in all other fields of science.

 

This cannot be said for Law, History, Art,

[Rahima]

Rubbish it is so it must be an art.